- From: Richard Ishida <ishida@w3.org>
- Date: Mon, 4 Aug 2008 13:03:24 +0100
- To: "'Ambrose Li'" <ambrose.li@gmail.com>, "'Brad Kemper'" <brkemper.comcast@gmail.com>
- Cc: "'Joeri Sebrechts'" <joeri@sebrechts.net>, <www-style@w3.org>
Ambrose, Is there a Unicode character for the 6-dot ellipsis? A quick search http://rishida.net/scripts/uniview/?search=ellipsis didn't reveal one. Cheers, RI ============ Richard Ishida Internationalization Lead W3C (World Wide Web Consortium) http://www.w3.org/International/ http://rishida.net/ > -----Original Message----- > From: www-style-request@w3.org [mailto:www-style-request@w3.org] On Behalf > Of Ambrose Li > Sent: 02 August 2008 20:15 > To: Brad Kemper > Cc: Joeri Sebrechts; www-style@w3.org > Subject: Re: text-overflow: ellipsis > > > 2008/8/2 Brad Kemper <brkemper.comcast@gmail.com>: > > > > If the convention does exist, shouldn't the appropriate character for the > > script in use be used? Thus a six dot ellipse (or six periods) automatically > > if using Chinese? > > Mostly, in computer user interfaces, the English ellipsis is > always used (I don't know why). I'd say the convention (of > actually using a 6-dot ellipsis) does not actually exist. > > So, by "one way or another" I meant (1) if some author feels > that a three-dot ellipsis is wrong because the Chinese ellipsis > should have 6 dots, he/she should have the option to use the > correct one, but (2) if the browser is required to always > default to the "correct" ellipsis I definitely won't mind :) > > -- > cheers, > -ambrose > > The 'net used to be run by smart people; now many sites are run by > idiots. So SAD... (Sites that do spam filtering on mails sent to the > abuse contact need to be cut off the net...)
Received on Monday, 4 August 2008 12:03:58 UTC